K. Douglas Thornton, of Conway, for Appellant. Martha L Hamel, of Pawleys Island, for Respondent. Carroll D Padgett, Jr., of Loris, Guardian Ad Litem.

Josette Robbins appeals the family court's decision to grant custody of her and John Divine's minor child to Mr. Divine. Ms. Robbins claims that the family court's ruling was erroneous because (1) the court placed undue weight on Mr. Divine's expert witness' testimony, (2) the court improperly exercised its discretion on several evidentiary rulings, (3) the court improperly determined credibility issues regarding the parties and their witnesses, and (4) Ms. Robbins' trial counsel was ineffective, which deprived her of substantive due process and a meaningful hearing.

Robert L. Jackson, of Columbia, for Appellants. J. J Taylor, of Columbia, for Respondent. Sabine S Boulware, of Columbia, Guardian Ad Litem.

Daniel and Debi Brookshire appeal the family court's dismissal of their action to adopt two children over whom the Brookshires held full custody. The Brookshires assert the trial court erred as a matter of law by using the minimum contacts standard in refusing to exercise personal jurisdiction over the respondent, who is a biological parent and a resident of Alabama.

Appellate Defender Kathrine H. Hudgins, of South Carolina Commission on Indigent Defense, of Columbia, for Appellant. Attorney General Henry Dargan McMaster, Chief Deputy Attorney General John W. McIntosh, Assistant Deputy Attorney General Salley W. Elliott, Senior Assistant Attorney General Norman Mark Rapoport, and Assistant Attorney General Michelle J. Parsons, of Columbia, for Respondent and Solicitor Douglas A Barfield, Jr., of Lancaster, for Respondent.

In this criminal matter, Pendergrass appeals his conviction for assault and battery with intent to kill (ABWIK) arguing the trial court erred in refusing to give a requested jury charge. Pendergrass further asserts the trial court erred in refusing to conduct an evidentiary hearing regarding two instances of alleged juror misconduct.

Deputy Chief Appellate Defender for Capital Appeals Robert M. Dudek, of South Carolina Commission on Indigent Defense, of Columbia, for Appellant. Attorney General Henry Dargan McMaster, Chief Deputy Attorney General John W. McIntosh, Assistant Deputy Attorney General Donald J. Zelenka, and Assistant Attorney General Alphonso Simon, Jr., of Office of the Attorney General, of Columbia, and Solicitor John G Hembree, of Conway, for Respondent.

Appellant Lemond Holland challenges his conviction for murder, assault and battery with intent to kill, and possession of a weapon during the commission of a violent crime. Holland contends the circuit court committed reversible error in failing to instruct the jury on voluntary manslaughter and in admitting evidence that was unduly prejudicial in violation of Rule 403, SCRE.

Appellate Defender Eleanor Duffy Cleary, of South Carolina Commission on Indigent Defense, of Columbia, for Appellant. Attorney General Henry Dargan McMaster, Chief Deputy Attorney General John W. McIntosh, Assistant Deputy Attorney General Salley W. Elliott, and Assistant Attorney General Deborah R.J. Shupe, of Office of the Attorney General, of Columbia, and Solicitor John G. Hembree, of Conway, for Respondent.

Garry L. Valentine appeals his conviction for trafficking cocaine, arguing the trial court erred in admitting the drug evidence obtained from a confidential informant because the chain of custody was defective.

Robert L. Widener, Celeste T. Jones, A. Victor Rawl, Jr.. and Andrew G. Melling, of Columbia, for Appellant. Curtis L. Ott, of Columbia, for Respondent CIBA Vision. Keith D. Munson and Sandi R. Wilson, of Greenville, for Respondent CIBA Vision. Daniel T. Sullivan, of Columbia, for Respondent Kim's Dollar Store.

Monica Weston sued CIBA Vision after she wore CIBA's contact lenses and subsequently suffered an eye infection. The trial court granted summary judgment to CIBA on the basis that federal law preempts South Carolina law in this product liability case. On appeal, Weston argues genuine issues of material fact existed, the trial court lacked jurisdiction to determine whether the contact lenses at issue were federally regulated, and the trial court erred in refusing to amend or clarify its summary judgment order.

A. Johnston Cox and John L. McCants, of Columbia, for Appellant. Hoover C. Blanton, of Columbia, and Creighton B. Coleman, of Winnsboro, for Respondents Samuel W. Rhodes and Piedmont Promotions. William O. Sweeny, of Columbia, for Respondents Marion Eadon d/b/a C&B Fabrications and Low Country Signs.

Auto-Owners appeals the circuit court's order in this declaratory judgment action. Auto-Owners asserts the circuit court erred in denying it relief pursuant to its Rule 60(b)(2), (4) and (5) motions, as well as finding Auto-Owners owed Marion Eadon a duty of indemnification pursuant to the policy at issue.

Larry G. Reddeck, of Lake City, for Appellant. James C. Rushton, III, of Florence, for Respondent.

From Florence County, this appeal arises from a condemnation action in which Appellant, James Pratt, demanded a jury trial. At trial, Appellant sought to introduce testimony and other evidence of cost-to-cure and adjustment costs, which the trial court excluded. A jury returned a verdict in favor of Appellant for $6,900. Appellant argues on appeal that the trial court erred in excluding the cost-to-cure and adjustment cost evidence.

John B. Seibels, Jr., and Jason Scott Luck, of Charleston, for Appellant. Richard L. Tapp, and Stephen P. Groves, Sr., of Charleston, for Respondent Mayo Read, Jr. Elizabeth Applegate Dieck, of Charleston, Carlisle Roberts, Jr., of Columbia, and Davis A. Whitfield-Cargile, of North Charleston, for Respondent SC Department of Health and Enviromental Control.

Too Tacky, Inc. appeals the circuit court's order affirming DHEC's grant of a critical area permit for the construction of a dock by neighboring landowner, Mayo Read, Sr. Too Tacky contends Read filed a false and incomplete application for the permit, did not establish ownership of the property at issue, and failed to establish any "abnormal" circumstances warranting issuance of the permit. Too Tacky further argues the circuit court did not give appropriate consideration to the impact of Read's dock on neighboring properties.

Darryl D. Smalls, of Columbia, for Appellants. Richard W. SImmons, II, of Columbia, for Respondent.

After suffering a shoulder injury at work, Kathleen Ragin Bennett sought workers' compensation benefits from her employer, Cracker Barrel Old Country Store, and its insurance carrier, Gallagher Bassett, (collectively "Cracker Barrel"). The single commissioner and the Appellate Panel of the Workers' Compensation Commission awarded her benefits based upon her hourly wage and reported tips, and the circuit court reversed. Cracker Barrel appeals from the circuit court's order requiring recalculation of Bennett's average weekly wage and compensation rate.

Ralph L. Gleaton, II, of Greenville for Appellant. Melvin D. Bannister, of Columbia, for Respondent.

The appellant contends the trial court erred in: (i) denying recovery under promissory estoppel; (ii) finding promissory estoppel is a quasi-contract action; and (iii) finding that recovery under promissory estoppel is barred by the South Carolina Tort Claims Act.

Deputy Chief Attorney for Capital Appeals Robert M. Dudek, of South Carolina Commission on Indigent Defense, of Columbia, for Appellant. Attorney General Henry Dargan McMaster, Chief Deputy Attorney General John W. McIntosh, Assistant Deputy Attorney General Salley W. Elliott, Senior Assistant Attorney General Norman Mark Rapoport, of Office of the Attorney General, of Columbia, and Solicitor Kevin S Brackett, of York, for Respondent.

Kevin Cornelius Odems appeals his convictions related to a burglary contending the trial court erred in denying his motion for directed verdict when no direct evidence linked him to the crime. Odems argues his presence in the getaway car after the crime and his fleeing the scene when stopped by police do not amount to substantial circumstantial evidence warranting submission of the case to the jury.

Elizabeth B. Robertson, of Greenville, for Appellant. Chace D. Campbell, of Greenville, for Respondents Doe, Roe, and Moe. Robert A. Clark, of Greenville, for Respondents T. Amanda Craven, of Spartanburg, Guardian ad Litem.

Father contends the family court erred in terminating his parental rights to three minor children, and thereafter, granting Respondents' petitions to adopt the children.

J. Hubert Wood, III, and Jason A. Williams, of Charleston, for Appellants. Steve Wukela, Jr., of Florence, for Respondent.

In this workers' compensation case we determine whether the trial court erred in failing to affirm the order of the Appellate Panel of the South Carolina Workers' Compensation Commission.

G.Turner Perrow and Franklin D. Beattie, Jr., of Georgetown, for Appellant. David C. Holler, of Sumter, for Respondent.

In this case, we are asked whether the magistrate erred as a matter of law in denying the appellant's request for a continuance, trying the case in the appellant's absence, and failing to enter sufficient findings of facts and conclusions of law.

Hemphill P. Pride, II, of Columbia, for Appellant. Attorney General Henry Dargan McMaster, Chief Deputy Attorney General John W. McIntosh, Assistant Deputy Attorney General Salley W. Elliott, of Office of the Attorney General, of Columbia, and Solicitor Kevin S. Brackett, of York, for Respondent.

In this criminal case, we must determine whether the trial court committed reversible error in denying Oglesby's motions for both a directed verdict and to suppress evidence.

J. J Wilkes, of Greenville, for Appellants. Rhett D Burney, of Laurens, for Respondent.

Gary Foster, Jean A. Burbage, Mike Foster and Jean Burbage as Trustee appeal the trial court's order granting summary judgment, arguing the trial court erred in: (1) voiding the deed; (2) ordering the transfer of funds to Harvey Foster where there was evidence the funds were a gift from Harvey Foster; (3) ordering the transfer of funds to Harvey Foster where there was evidence that a portion of the funds were used to pay Harvey Foster's assisted care expenses; and (4) finding there was no evidence as to Harvey Foster's incompetence.